If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

imported post

I think he was definitely reckless in firing 3 shots at an opening door in a motel room. I've been given the wrong room number before with a key card and to my surprise when I opened the door someone was laying on the bed watching TV, I'm glad they didn't shoot me.

imported post

5918mike wrote:

I think he was definitely reckless in firing 3 shots at an opening door in a motel room. I've been given the wrong room number before with a key card and to my surprise when I opened the door someone was laying on the bed watching TV, I'm glad they didn't shoot me.

Like it or not, a hotel room is not your home. I would probably have my gun at the ready, but firing at an opening door in a hotel is asking for trouble.

imported post

Forum:

I don't often post, but I lurk a lot. I also read Dave Workman's Examiner post on a regular basis.

I am perplexed by this situation. While I don't know all of the facts of the circumstances, other than those that have been printed in the articles that Dave references, it seems to me that this man has been convicted prior to being tried by a jury.

It is my understanding that WA Use of Deadly Force "is justifiable in the actual resistance of an attempt to commit a felonly on the slayer...or upon or in a dwelling". Further, RCW 9A.52.025 defines residential burglary as "if with intent to commit a crime against a person or property therein... enters or remains unlawfully in a dwelling. Further RCW 9A.52.040 indicates, "any person who enters or remains unlawfully in a buildingmay be inferred to have acted with intent to commit a crime against a person or property therein, unless...explained by evidence satisfactory to the trier of fact to have been made without such criminal intent". While I don't have an RCW to the effect, Dave's article states that a hotel/motel is a temporary abode and thus Washington's Castle Doctrine applies.

While it may be prudent to announce that you have a gun to warn an intruder, I can't find anything in the RCW that requires one to do so.

Thus, it seems to me that if defense can demonstrate that the door was opened at any time prior to the firing of the first shot, that this was in fact defense of premise.

There are contradictory indications regarding whether or not the door was open. Ballistics apparently indicate that it was not. The man that was shot, his wife, and the defendent all indicate that at some point it was. Perhaps it was, and then was immediately closed. I have opened hotel rooms to hear/see others in the room and immediately closed the door. This would be for the courts to decide.

What troubles me here is that Dave Workman in his post of July 20 and many others in articles and responses - including some on this board, seem to have already tried and convicted this man. Based on the note that he has apparently left with his attorney, this to some extent has contributed to him losing faith in our legal system and life in general.

I hope that if I am ever required to chose between being a victim of a presumed attacker, or being the victim of our legal system and society as a whole as theresult of use of deadly force- that all of you will try to "stand in my shoes", look at all of the evidence, andunderstand that in the few seconds between life anddeathit is possible to make a decision that we will later regret but which is justifiable at the moment of decision.

imported post

After reading the article written by Rick Anderson, I get the very distinct feeling of a shocked community "where such things don't happen" driving the pace of a tricky investigation. Almost....not quite...but almost...it has the taste of railroading.

What bothers me most between the actions of both men is Mr. Gomez's "shoot first" mindset. While knowing my own tactics, and if I had been in his shoes, I probably would have rolled off to the far side of the bed and taken a defensive position before then choosing to fire. The entire incident smacks of a knee-jerk reaction to an unknown variable by a man who was startled from his sleep. The fact that a round went through a wall into the next unit is evidence of that fact. It was a panic shoot, period.

The thing is....I wasn't in Mr. Gomez's shoes, he was...and HE had to make the judgment based upon what he knew at the time.

However tragic, there are simply things that happen at times that are due to a series of unfortunate events. Both men could have taken simple steps to keep this incident from happening at all, but they didn't. Shame on both of them.

What it comes down to for me, and in Mr. Gomez's defense, is the right of one person to be in room #7 at that moment in time, and not the other. However unfortunate, Mr. Pfaeffle made a mistake by entering (or attempting to enter) a room he had no right to enter. Intentionally, or unintentionally is beside the point as far as I am concerned because the individual that made the greater mistake of the two, is the one who paid for it with his life.

At worst, and if all else is as written, the only charge Mr. Gomez should face is one of reckless discharge of a gun.

MHO

In a free society, bad things still happen, but they happen with all parties being held responsible for their part, regardless of how "sad" it may be.

imported post

The prosecution says that the door was closed, locked, and wedged with a chair. If they are correct then the door was not open or being opened and the suspect shot with complete disregard.

He says the door was opened when he shot and it was in complete self defense.

I will wait until the evidence comes out and there is a final outcome to pass judgment on either side.

From what I have read, the door was not locked because the lock was broken, thus the reason for the chair. (I would have asked for another room.)
The key was not for the room in question and should have not opened the lock/door but did because the lock was broken. (should motel bear some responsibility?)
Prosecutor says door was closed when shots fired. Defense said door could be opened up to 9" with the chair in place.
(My thoughts are the door opened, the guy saw him and decided to fire but by the time he got out his gun and fired they guy had shut the door again. Just a theory)

imported post

Tom was a friend of mine and in the circle of friends that I have. From what I was told since the very next morning was that he was shot THROUGH the door in front of his wife. The killer did not give any warnings and did not wait for the door to open. He had recently gotten out of jail and claimed that he had enemies in Twisp and was on edge, woken from sleep with his two guns on either side of him in the bed.

I am all for defending ones surroundings, but what if it was the maid, not seeing the do not disturb sign? It is ridiculous to think that this man is an innocent, law abiding citizen, when in fact, it sounds dubious from what I have heard that he was even lawfully carrying. I am not sure what his previous jail time was for, but he is obviously not legal to carry now and is disregarding it.

imported post

Sounds like he jumped the gun, no pun intended. I would have announced, and if they either didn't respond or kept entering, I would fire only when I could acquire a target. Firing through a door is asking for trouble.

I've walked into the wrong hotel room before because the hotel assigned me to an occupied room. Glad I'm not dead.

imported post

FMCDH wrote:

The thing is....I wasn't in Mr. Gomez's shoes, he was...and HE had to make the judgment based upon what he knew at the time.

However tragic, there are simply things that happen at times that are due to a series of unfortunate events. Both men could have taken simple steps to keep this incident from happening at all, but they didn't. Shame on both of them.
....
At worst, and if all else is as written, the only charge Mr. Gomez should face is one of reckless discharge of a gun.

If only Gomez had been a member of this forum. He would have gotten a chance to read the now world-famous

imported post

if i am sleeping and someone comes intoyour room at night uninvited, accidental or not. you have a right to defend yourself. if this was a woman who shot him it would never have gone this far.

its a joke with the double standards they have

Your joking right? The guys room wasn't invaded the door was opened (maybe), I've had strangers I don't know enter my apartment on accident and I tell them they got the wrong place, and no one has been shot and only a few saw me with a gun. All I need to hear was this guy was wearing a belly holster for bed time, this reminds me of U8dust wanting to murder the pizza guy for trespassing.

We shouldn't have to be worried about entering the wrong room door for fear of death that would idiotic, the guy at fault is this paranoid who murdered someone over irrational fear.

imported post

FunkTrooper wrote:

Your joking right? The guys room wasn't invaded the door was opened (maybe), I've had strangers I don't know enter my apartment on accident and I tell them they got the wrong place, and no one has been shot and only a few saw me with a gun. All I need to hear was this guy was wearing a belly holster for bed time, this reminds me of U8dust wanting to murder the pizza guy for trespassing.

We shouldn't have to be worried about entering the wrong room door for fear of death that would idiotic,the guy at fault is this paranoid who murdered someone over irrational fear.

imported post

Not really.... personally, i would rather agree with FunkTrooper here. I am a firm believer in Target ID, knowing exactly what my round(s) will strike, and what is behind and/or in the possible area of effect. I believe firing upon an un-identified target is what creates fracturside, [not so] friendly fire, dead husbands, wives, children or friends, innocent [accidental] strangers,etc. Even if one is alone in a motel room, or alone at home, to assume that everything we hear, curtains moving, doors opening etc are to be fired upon... wow... my house would be full of holes, not to mention my neighbors... and if i lived in an apartment (i live in a house on 1/4 acre - even then)... wow...

- I probably would have readied my firearm, and upon contact barked a command, but without solid RAS to believe i was under attack, i would not have fired... once a valid threat is identified..... fire... and know i was 100% in the right.

- We as the responsible bearers of arms MUST remain accountable for our mistakes. The loss of an innocent life because "I thought" is deplorable... Whats good for the goose, is good for the gander, we want to hold our neighbors, strangers,government, and LEO accountable when they make mistakes, we to are held to the same standard as any other human.

Simple rule... "Know your target, don't assume it".

Just my opinion here.

Bat

P.S. (as edit) People that are making mistakes (like entering wrong motel room, or apartment) don't KNOW they are making that mistake, and wont be able to announce or convey their intentions until they are staring you in the eye, or looking around thinking "this isn't my stuff" (and probably feeling embarrassed as hell) .... and shooting them would be horribly inappropriate, not to mention rude. I had a red Honda civic for a while, there were a few times i accidentally tried to open the wrong red civic, and a couple times i found someone trying to use their key on my car... both were embarrassing (and innocent) moments, and both led to a little chuckle and "oops, my bad, sorry bout that!" ... was better then shooting them, or being shot myself... and more polite too.

~ ENCLAVE vmc ~
The Enclave is looking for patriotic motorcycle riders in Washington State who support liberty and freedom for all. ~ Check us out!~* " To be swayed neither by the opponent nor by his sword is the essence of swordsmanship." - Miyamoto Musashi.

imported post

Well known, but I wouldn't call him famous. Certainly not enough to warrant a railroad as you put it. I didn't mean a Maid entering in that exact circumstance. Regardless, I have had maids enter rooms without announcing day and night. Especially if they do not think you are there. Tom and his wife were at a friends 50th birthday party from what I understand, so of course they were most likely drinking. So what? Even if he yelled, "I am drunk raving mad and coming in your room to rob you!", the deadly force would still be in question. Since he SHOT THROUGH THE DOOR. You MUST identify your target. There is no issue here. He had a right to defend himself, but the way he did was reckless. I personally believe that he should in no way get tried for premeditated murder. Manslaughter perhaps, but nothing more. Then again I am not a lawyer. I do feel that he was in the wrong by not at least saying anything before shooting.